Politics thread (USA Elections 2016) - Page 293

This thread gives me a headache, how do u guys stay sane dealing with politics

On June 17 2021 09:11 Stroggoz wrote: Show nested quote + On June 17 2021 08:26 Spitfiree wrote: Can't a leftie be AGAINST stupidity even if pushed by the left but still pro higher taxation? Yes? Most are, there's a segment of the left that spend all day on twitter and facebook and have an addiction to it, and appear to be pro-stupidity. I think they are a pretty small segment of the left but they get the most attention for obvious reasons.

Was more of a rhetorical question to Baal and blackjacki, didn't actually expect an answer

On June 17 2021 21:53 Spitfiree wrote: Show nested quote + On June 17 2021 09:11 Stroggoz wrote:   On June 17 2021 08:26 Spitfiree wrote: Can't a leftie be AGAINST stupidity even if pushed by the left but still pro higher taxation? Yes? Most are, there's a segment of the left that spend all day on twitter and facebook and have an addiction to it, and appear to be pro-stupidity. I think they are a pretty small segment of the left but they get the most attention for obvious reasons. Was more of a rhetorical question to Baal and blackjacki, didn't actually expect an answer

I don't think anyone here is saying that lefties can't be pro higher taxation and anti-shoplifting.

Stroggoz is saying that only a few radicals on the left are okay with shoplifting. I think he is right in that but it misses the bigger picture. If police or private security try to uphold the law and prevent theft and there is a confrontation and it leads to one of these shoplifters getting injured or killed then there would be riots and these stores would burn to the ground. That's why they just let them walk out the front door. These stores "could" hire enough security to prevent theft but it's not worth it because there is a large enough voice on the left that have decided it's racist if you stop a black person from stealing from your store so it's easier to just close down the store then have your brand be labeled as racist. That's the issue - not that people on the left are "pro-shoplifting" it's that they are "anti-enforcing the laws." That's not any less radical if the result is the same...

Meanwhile in San Francisco a 94 year old Asian woman was stabbed in San Francisco yesterday



That guy that did the stabbing has a long criminal history including murder and burglary charges. The pro-crime DA, Chesea Boudin, that prosecutes a fraction of the cases the police bring to him still has the nerve to blame the police for why his soft-on-crime policies are leading to chaos.

On June 17 2021 09:11 Stroggoz wrote: Show nested quote + On June 17 2021 08:26 Spitfiree wrote: Can't a leftie be AGAINST stupidity even if pushed by the left but still pro higher taxation? Yes? Most are, there's a segment of the left that spend all day on twitter and facebook and have an addiction to it, and appear to be pro-stupidity. I think they are a pretty small segment of the left but they get the most attention for obvious reasons.

So if reasonable leftists also oppose this, how come this is a law?

On June 17 2021 23:41 Baalim wrote: Show nested quote + On June 17 2021 09:11 Stroggoz wrote:   On June 17 2021 08:26 Spitfiree wrote: Can't a leftie be AGAINST stupidity even if pushed by the left but still pro higher taxation? Yes? Most are, there's a segment of the left that spend all day on twitter and facebook and have an addiction to it, and appear to be pro-stupidity. I think they are a pretty small segment of the left but they get the most attention for obvious reasons. So if reasonable leftists also oppose this, how come this is a law?

Yep, exactly right. Proposition 47 received 60% of the vote when it was passed. Defund the police is a mainstream left-wing idea. SF DA Chesa Boudin ran on the promised policies that he is now carrying out. This is a classic example of buyer's remorse where leftists in California are starting to realize the policies they supported are failing and are now trying to convince everyone that they never supported these policies.

On June 17 2021 23:41 Baalim wrote: Show nested quote + On June 17 2021 09:11 Stroggoz wrote:   On June 17 2021 08:26 Spitfiree wrote: Can't a leftie be AGAINST stupidity even if pushed by the left but still pro higher taxation? Yes? Most are, there's a segment of the left that spend all day on twitter and facebook and have an addiction to it, and appear to be pro-stupidity. I think they are a pretty small segment of the left but they get the most attention for obvious reasons. So if reasonable leftists also oppose this, how come this is a law?

The law doesn't seem unreasonable looking at it on face value. A misdemeanor is still something you'll get punished for and shoplifting is a minor offense. I think I would have voted on it if I lived there. I wasn't actually talking about this, I was talking about the tribalism on the left that Spitfire was vaguely referring to.

The discussion on this law hasn't reached the level of basic rationality yet. People can cite a statistic, but the whole range of statistics need to be looked at. Obvious ones i'd begin with are things like: money saved from people not being in jail, effects from diverting police funding to other area's. Lots of other things i can think of. Just looking on the internet there have been quite a few studies on the effects of this law and some of them appear to have good conclusions.

Stroggoz you dummy!!! please stick to POKER and MAFF instead of poltics!!!

I have to say that the law actually makes a lot of sense and that's not the issue by itself but the DA and Police in a combination with the weird social beliefs is what makes it horrendous

The law basically fines you for 1k$ for theft up to 950$ on your first offense which sounds quite reasonable. Except the police doesn't do shit so you can steal as long and much as you wish

The US feels so.. fragmented. There are many policies that only make sense in a society that has implemented a bunch of other policies in the first place, yet in the US, seems like they make the initial jump all the way.

Like, I'm okay with shoplifting being a misdemeanor and not something that results in serious criminal charges, and while police shouldn't neglect to police it, it doesn't have to be heavily prioritized. A 16 year old girl that steals a pair of $150 shoes shouldn't have a bunch of future life options closed because of that action.

But that only makes sense if society is peaceful and egalitarian in a way that makes shoplifting not be a big problem. If shoplifting is rampant, it has to be policed.

Basically I'd rather concentrate on fixing the underlying societal problems that cause a lot of people to shoplift than focus on strongly penalizing shoplifting. But you can't choose doing neither.

On June 18 2021 12:18 Liquid`Drone wrote: Basically I'd rather concentrate on fixing the underlying societal problems that cause a lot of people to shoplift than focus on strongly penalizing shoplifting. But you can't choose doing neither.

Yeah political discussion rarely meets this level of rationality, its sad that people have to even explain that this option should be considered.

On June 18 2021 20:02 Stroggoz wrote: Show nested quote + On June 18 2021 12:18 Liquid`Drone wrote: Basically I'd rather concentrate on fixing the underlying societal problems that cause a lot of people to shoplift than focus on strongly penalizing shoplifting. But you can't choose doing neither. Yeah political discussion rarely meets this level of rationality, its sad that people have to even explain that this option should be considered.

I think if anyone here needs this explained to them it's probably you. The last time I brought up this incompetent prosecutor all you did was defend him by saying the US incarcerates too many people, treats criminals too savagely, and it's too early to tell if his policies are really causing more crime. My response then was basically identical to Eri's point now:

On April 04 2021 22:15 blackjacki2 wrote: In regards to your more broad point that the US already incarcerates more people than it should and criminal justice reform is sorely needed - the solution to that isn't to just have the DA prosecute fewer people. You need social programs, safety nets, less poverty. Unilaterally deciding to not prosecute as many criminals might lower the incarceration rate but I doubt it will lower the crime rate. It's the DA's job to prosecute crimes.

It's a shame that something that is common sense to myself and Eri is apparently out of grasp to the people governing San Francisco. It's no wonder people are fleeing the city in record numbers, the DA is facing a recall petition, and homelessness and crime are rampant.

I wasn't really defending him, you correctly represented me when I said it's too early to tell the effects of the policy. I bring up things like mass incarceration because I think people ought to prioritize caring about the problems in society that cause the most [easily preventable] harm, if they are concerned about harm, but also thought the debate was more complex than what you presented. Numbers are very important here, if the motivation behind pointing out the rise in shoplifting is that it is harming shopkeepers because of financial harm, then I want to look at the problems that cause the most financial harm. That's my agenda and it's basically why I focus on things like tax evasion, wage theft, ect.

The causes behind crime are extremely complex. I agree that things like poverty can be a factor but so can many other things. Looking into this it seems pretty uncontroversial that prop 47 is the main cause behind a rise in shoplifting in CA though.

On June 18 2021 12:18 Liquid`Drone wrote: The US feels so.. fragmented. There are many policies that only make sense in a society that has implemented a bunch of other policies in the first place, yet in the US, seems like they make the initial jump all the way. Like, I'm okay with shoplifting being a misdemeanor and not something that results in serious criminal charges, and while police shouldn't neglect to police it, it doesn't have to be heavily prioritized. A 16 year old girl that steals a pair of $150 shoes shouldn't have a bunch of future life options closed because of that action. But that only makes sense if society is peaceful and egalitarian in a way that makes shoplifting not be a big problem. If shoplifting is rampant, it has to be policed. Basically I'd rather concentrate on fixing the underlying societal problems that cause a lot of people to shoplift than focus on strongly penalizing shoplifting. But you can't choose doing neither.

But was shoplifting being punished with life-changing consecuences? If so then fine, lower the punishment but that is not the issue here the complaints are that it isn't being policed at all.

Depending on who you are I have the impression that a lot of police interactions has life-changing consequences in the US. But I mean I agree that it should be policed. Stuff that is criminal should be policed, and theft, even if just shoplifting, should be criminal.

I don't think a 'tough on crime' approach is how to deal with this - I think a 'spend time money and effort on building communities where people aren't so desperate that they turn to shoplifting' (winona ryder is not your average shoplifter) is the solution, but not wanting a 'tough on crime' approach doesn't mean I want a neglectful towards crime approach, either. Shoplifting isn't a victimless crime either.

The US has a 'three strike rule' which even take into consideration misdemeanors into consideration... they made a law that can change the life of a person based on a baseball rule. The things you could go to prison for in the US sound almost hilarious to me. You're all aware of the prison population ratio in the US compared to ... pretty much every other country on the planet.

That's the reason why the left is pushing such an agenda. The issue is, the American society doesn't seem to be ready for that, so it ends up doing more bad than good.... The enforcement and judicial pillars are obviously rotten

yes three strike rule is from the famous republican stronghold of california buddy left hates it

NZ has the 3 strike rule as well, except the three strikes have to be violent or sexual and you get min 7 years in jail once that happens. In the US it's far worse. The root cause of these kinds of policies is what criminologists call 'penal populism', where the media profits off the sensationalism of crime, then the public has an increased perception of the level of crime, and this incentives politicians to go tough on crime to get votes. If you actually look at the police, the media, and government, imo the police are the most rational and progressive on this matter-at least in NZ. But they are being told what to do.

On June 22 2021 18:44 Santafairy wrote: yes three strike rule is from the famous republican stronghold of california buddy left hates it

I'm merely suggesting that the left in the US is trying to do what neoliberals tried to do in the Middle East - force a culture that is foreign and incomprehensible... it's bound to fail, especially if you attempt to treat the result of a problem instead of the root cause

The shoplifting thing doesn't even scratch the surface of the incompetence of the liberals that govern this area. Look at the housing crisis. Basically every house in the Bay cost $1 million minimum. There's epic levels of homelessness, houses are selling for hundreds of thousands over asking price and yet any attempt to develop land and build more housing gets obstructed. Someone posted this meme to the Bay Area subreddit a few days ago

https://www.reddit.com/r/bayarea/comm...dium=android_app&utm_source=share

Here's an example, in Berkeley they have been trying to build a 260 unit building with 50% affordable units for years but there has been a legal battle with the city that have decided this is a sacred site of a native people. Right now the plot is used as a filthy parking lot but I guess all the historical shit is underground and they would have to disturb it to construct the buildings foundation. Better to have homeless people shitting in the parking lot on top of it than to develop it for housing.

https://www.berkeleyside.org/2021/06/...-260-unit-apartment-at-1900-fourth-st

Isn't it interesting that these progressive cities, portland, seattle, San fran etc. have a worse homeless problem than anywhere? Los Angeles is allocating $1 Billion dollars in its latest budget for homelessness and they have probably the worst homeless crisis of anywhere in the developed world. Ever been to Venice Beach lately? The entire boardwalk is tents from end to end. But if they just had a little more tax money they could solve everything...